Kleemann tune on new 5.5 bi-t...690HP
#1
Super Member
Thread Starter
Kleemann tune on new 5.5 bi-t...690HP
Pretty sick. 690HP & 704ft/lb.
And that's just a tune. Sheesh.
http://kleemann.dk/Performance/Engin...MGBT_M157.aspx
And that's just a tune. Sheesh.
http://kleemann.dk/Performance/Engin...MGBT_M157.aspx
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Renntech tune " With a tune only, the 2012 CLS63 made 669 horsepower and 734 ft-lbs of torque (569.13 horsepower and 624.94 ft/lbs of torque at the wheels). "
https://mbworld.org/forums/cls55-amg...u-upgrade.html
Wow Kleemann outdid in hp
https://mbworld.org/forums/cls55-amg...u-upgrade.html
Wow Kleemann outdid in hp
Trending Topics
#8
Super Member
Thread Starter
Renntech tune " With a tune only, the 2012 CLS63 made 669 horsepower and 734 ft-lbs of torque (569.13 horsepower and 624.94 ft/lbs of torque at the wheels). "
https://mbworld.org/forums/cls55-amg...u-upgrade.html
Wow Kleemann outdid in hp
https://mbworld.org/forums/cls55-amg...u-upgrade.html
Wow Kleemann outdid in hp
That tells me Renntech may have more room.
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
I don't put much faith in tuners' peak crank hp and torque #'s. I prefer to see before and after dynos which provide much more tangible information.
Tom
Tom
#13
Administrator
![](https://staticssl.ibsrv.net/autocomm/Content/MB/mbwambassador2.gif)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: THE Orange County, California
Posts: 11,921
Received 796 Likes
on
495 Posts
2020 Audi R8 V10, 2016 AMG GTS, 2018 E63S Edition 1, 2018 Porsche GTS Cab, 2012 C63 BS
Renntech tune " With a tune only, the 2012 CLS63 made 669 horsepower and 734 ft-lbs of torque (569.13 horsepower and 624.94 ft/lbs of torque at the wheels). "
https://mbworld.org/forums/cls55-amg...u-upgrade.html
Wow Kleemann outdid in hp
https://mbworld.org/forums/cls55-amg...u-upgrade.html
Wow Kleemann outdid in hp
Different dyno, diff day, conditions, and different marketing LOL- I dont take too much stock in whats higher. I take stock in the faster more powerful car at the strip. So far RT has tangible proof in my eyes.
Agree Tom... lets see the K car vs. the RT car in the real world.
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida-Germany-New York
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 30 Likes
on
25 Posts
2004 E55,1969 300SEL6.3,2011 ML350 BlueTec Diesel,2005 ML400 CDI
Matters not son - - - just look at the 1/4 mi et's to date. These cars will be in the 9's very soon. 800 BHP is readily attainable. If Porsche can make 600 BHP from 3.6 liters out of the box . . . well you do the math.
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
![EEK!](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/eek.gif)
Actually 1/4 mile ETs are not optimal to ascertain power...ETs are more of a function of traction off the line. I would say 1/4 mile trap speeds are more indicative of power. You rarely ever see tuners mention 1/4 mile trap speed...I was responding to people comparing RENNtech hp claims vs Kleemann hp claims. As I said before, the crank #'s thrown around mean very little to me...I would rather see before and after dynos. Would I prefer to see 1/4 mile trap speeds out in the real world too, yes...but like I said you don't see many tuners taking the cars directly out on the track...they usually have their customers post the results.
Tom
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
kleemann is one of the longest standing and most reputable mb tuners out there. unlike most companies, if they make a claim i'm a believer!
#18
MBWorld Fanatic!
RT tune for all kind of cars, BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Ferrari....... but Kleemann tune only Mercedes thats why I chose K for my car.
#19
MBWorld Fanatic!
Tom
#20
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida-Germany-New York
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 30 Likes
on
25 Posts
2004 E55,1969 300SEL6.3,2011 ML350 BlueTec Diesel,2005 ML400 CDI
Is that your way of trying to tell me that you are my long-lost daddy?
I am not sure what to make of your post....are you agreeing that tuners' crank hp claims mean very little?
Actually 1/4 mile ETs are not optimal to ascertain power...ETs are more of a function of traction off the line. I would say 1/4 mile trap speeds are more indicative of power. You rarely ever see tuners mention 1/4 mile trap speed...I was responding to people comparing RENNtech hp claims vs Kleemann hp claims. As I said before, the crank #'s thrown around mean very little to me...I would rather see before and after dynos. Would I prefer to see 1/4 mile trap speeds out in the real world too, yes...but like I said you don't see many tuners taking the cars directly out on the track...they usually have their customers post the results.
Tom
![EEK!](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/eek.gif)
Actually 1/4 mile ETs are not optimal to ascertain power...ETs are more of a function of traction off the line. I would say 1/4 mile trap speeds are more indicative of power. You rarely ever see tuners mention 1/4 mile trap speed...I was responding to people comparing RENNtech hp claims vs Kleemann hp claims. As I said before, the crank #'s thrown around mean very little to me...I would rather see before and after dynos. Would I prefer to see 1/4 mile trap speeds out in the real world too, yes...but like I said you don't see many tuners taking the cars directly out on the track...they usually have their customers post the results.
Tom
#21
MBWorld Fanatic!
#22
MBWorld Fanatic!